Description
The distinction between VET and higher education in Australia is blurring. The purpose of this paper is to examine – through the conduct of a case study of engineering qualifications (AQF6) delivered in Victoria – how education and training providers and students are likely to respond to different fees and funding arrangements under the student entitlement model.Summary
About the research
This paper presents a case study in which the authors attempted to understand the impact, on student choice, of reforms in tertiary education in Australia, namely, a shift towards a demand-driven system and the blurring of the distinction between vocational education and training (VET) and higher education.
The authors compared the advanced diploma and the associate degree in engineering and related technologies offered as a pathway to a four-year degree, using data available in October 2011 on the websites of providers and from the Victorian Government, the first jurisdiction to adopt an entitlement model and the state in which most mixed-sector tertiary institutions operate.
Key messages
- A VET advanced diploma is a substantially cheaper proposition than a higher education associate degree.
- This makes the advanced diploma very attractive from the perspective of a student seeking a two-year qualification for immediate entry to the labour market.
- If the student subsequently wishes to articulate into a four-year degree, then the associate degree is the better proposition.
- This is because the associate degree is given more credit in a degree program (and so the advanced diploma graduate has to bear the cost of delayed entry into the labour market).
- The advanced diploma would need to be restructured if it were to provide as much credit as the associate degree.
- From a provider's perspective, government-funded higher education places are worth more than VET (at least in engineering).
The case study shows that the differences in fees, academic credit arrangements and level of government funding are likely to impact on both student choice and institutes' provision of education and training.
Tom Karmel
Managing Director